CathInfo.com

I'll say  this much.  While I suspect that both the Thuc and Mendez lines are valid, BOTH of these lines look comparatively clownish, and riddled with scandal, as compared to that of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Lefebvre seems to have done everything by the book as much as possible.  A man of conviction.  Both of these others seem "sketchy."

If I were Latin Rite, I would attend an SSPX.  Honestly, very possibly even if I was Sedevacantist, I might still do so (and just sort of stay  quiet about it) becuase the Lefebvre lines just seem so much more safer.  I'm not persuaded either the Thuc or Mendez line are more safe than the Novus Ordo ones (though I assume the validity of all of them.)

In the debate between Cekada and Jenkins, Fr Cekada attempts to show that Fr Jenkins breaks cannon law by refusing communion to those associated with thuc liners, he gives the cannon and the 4 requirements (only 1 of 4 have to apply) for a priest to refuse communion and, at first glance, it seems Fr. Cekada has pinned Fr. Jenkins into a corner. However, Fr. Jenkins asks him, brilliantly, “would you give Holy Communion to someone wearing a baseball cap?” To which Fr. Cekada replies “no, he would fall under public sinner” but wearing a baseball cap isn’t a public sin.

You have a double standard, and that's often referred to as hypocrisy.  You condemn the CMRI for excommunicating the SSPX (at least according to your one source), but then claim it's perfectly OK for the SSPV to do the same thing.

The idiocy of Father Cekada's response has to do with the fact that wearing a baseball cap is not public sin, but it could theoretically fall under the requirement for the priest to maintain the proper decorum of Holy Communion.  It's not in the realm of "public sin" as Father Cekada claims.

SSPV made up this allegation that the CMRI are schismatic (Old Catholic) and then made up this nonsense about Thuc-line orders being invalid.  Father Kelly is known to have refused the Last Sacraments to a dying person who was sympathetic to Feeneyism.  When priest like those of the SSPV start excommunicating people, they are making themselves mini popes, and it's a schismatic tendency.

Now, if, as you alleged, the CMRI has effectively excommunicated the SSPX, then they're wrong too.  But they're both wrong.  Your hypocrisy comes from the fact that you think it's perfectly OK for the SSPV to do this but not the CMRI.

It's clear that the SSPV pray on the scrupulous, fan the flames of negative doubt and try to legitimize it, and thereby engage in a mass brainwashing program.  You are a victim, CIA.

You have a double standard, and that's often referred to as hypocrisy.  You condemn the CMRI for excommunicating the SSPX (at least according to your one source), but then claim it's perfectly OK for the SSPV to do the same thing.

The idiocy of Father Cekada's response has to do with the fact that wearing a baseball cap is not public sin, but it could theoretically fall under the requirement for the priest to maintain the proper decorum of Holy Communion.  It's not in the realm of "public sin" as Father Cekada claims.

SSPV made up this allegation that the CMRI are schismatic (Old Catholic) and then made up this nonsense about Thuc-line orders being invalid.  Father Kelly is known to have refused the Last Sacraments to a dying person who was sympathetic to Feeneyism.  When priest like those of the SSPV start excommunicating people, they are making themselves mini popes, and it's a schismatic tendency.

Now, if, as you alleged, the CMRI has effectively excommunicated the SSPX, then they're wrong too.  But they're both wrong.  Your hypocrisy comes from the fact that you think it's perfectly OK for the SSPV to do this but not the CMRI.

It's clear that the SSPV pray on the scrupulous, fan the flames of negative doubt and try to legitimize it, and thereby engage in a mass brainwashing program.  You are a victim, CIA.

You say the sspv started all this false information.... you and I both know that’s not tru. Fr. Cekada called them untouchable in an article in 1983 and after Fr. Jenkins, Fr. Jelly, and Fr. Sanborns trip to Germany they all mutually agreed they couldn’t be associated with them. Even after Fr Sanborn left, he refused to attend the consecration of Dolan. 
You may view wht the sspv does as wrong, but it is totally different from what the CMRI does. The CMRI tells people not to go to the sspx because they are non Catholics. The sspv says not o go to thuc line because it is doubtful and tainted with schism. The CMRI raises thuc to be a hero, the sspv knows the true hero is lefebvre. The sspv lets people decide for themselves on sedevacantism because they don’t have to authority to bind people to it, the CMRI says if you aren’t sedevacantist you aren’t Catholic. Now with the una cuм issue, if they say “don’t go” that’s one thing, but they don’t just do that. They call it a MORTAL SIN. That is the definition of making your own sect.